The Experts below are selected from a list of 17187 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Francesco Stellacci - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The effect of nanometre-scale structure on Interfacial Energy
Nature Materials, 2009Co-Authors: Jeffrey J. Kuna, Kislon Voïtchovsky, Chetana Singh, Hao Jiang, Steve Mwenifumbo, Pradip K. Ghorai, Molly M. Stevens, Sharon C. Glotzer, Francesco StellacciAbstract:The Interfacial Energy between a macroscopic surface consisting of different materials and a liquid is independent of the surface structure. It is now shown that because of the way in which a multicomponent nanoscale surface affects the solvent–molecule arrangement, it is both the surface structure and composition that dictate the Interfacial Energy. Natural surfaces are often structured with nanometre-scale domains, yet a framework providing a quantitative understanding of how nanostructure affects Interfacial Energy, γ _SL, is lacking. Conventional continuum thermodynamics treats γ _SL solely as a function of average composition, ignoring structure. Here we show that, when a surface has domains commensurate in size with solvent molecules, γ _SL is determined not only by its average composition but also by a structural component that causes γ _SL to deviate from the continuum prediction by a substantial amount, as much as 20% in our system. By contrasting surfaces coated with either molecular- (5 nm), we find that whereas the latter surfaces have the expected linear dependence of γ _SL on surface composition, the former show a markedly different non-monotonic trend. Molecular dynamics simulations show how the organization of the solvent molecules at the interface is controlled by the nanostructured surface, which in turn appreciably modifies γ _SL.
-
the effect of nanometre scale structure on Interfacial Energy
Nature Materials, 2009Co-Authors: Jeffrey J. Kuna, Kislon Voïtchovsky, Chetana Singh, Hao Jiang, Steve Mwenifumbo, Pradip K. Ghorai, Molly M. Stevens, Sharon C. Glotzer, Francesco StellacciAbstract:Natural surfaces are often structured with nanometre-scale domains, yet a framework providing a quantitative understanding of how nanostructure affects Interfacial Energy, SL, is lacking. Conventional continuum thermodynamics treats SL solely as a function of average composition, ignoring structure. Here we show that, when a surface has domains commensurate in size with solvent molecules, SL is determined not only by its average composition but also by a structural component that causes SL to deviate from the continuum prediction by a substantial amount, as much as 20% in our system. By contrasting surfaces coated with either molecular- ( 5 nm), we find that whereas the latter surfaces have the expected linear dependence of SL on surface composition, the former show a markedly different non-monotonic trend. Molecular dynamics simulations show how the organization of the solvent molecules at the interface is controlled by the nanostructured surface, which in turn appreciably modifies SL.
Jiuzhou Zhao - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Interfacial Energy between al melt and tib2 particles and efficiency of tib2 particles to nucleate α al
Scripta Materialia, 2019Co-Authors: Lili Zhang, Qiuju Zheng, Hongxiang Jiang, Jiuzhou ZhaoAbstract:Abstract The Interfacial Energy between Al melt and TiB2 particles is calculated based on the Gibbs absorption isotherm. The efficiency of TiB2 to nucleate α-Al is discussed. The Interfacial Energy between Al melt and TiB2 remains almost constant while the efficiency of TiB2 to nucleate α-Al depends on the solute Ti concentration (xTi) in Al melt. When xTi is less than 1.78 × 10−4 at%, TiB2 cannot nucleate α-Al. With the increase of xTi, the efficiency of TiB2 to nucleate α-Al increases until a complete wetting of TiB2 particles by solid Al in the environment of liquid Al is achieved.
Jeffrey J. Kuna - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The effect of nanometre-scale structure on Interfacial Energy
Nature Materials, 2009Co-Authors: Jeffrey J. Kuna, Kislon Voïtchovsky, Chetana Singh, Hao Jiang, Steve Mwenifumbo, Pradip K. Ghorai, Molly M. Stevens, Sharon C. Glotzer, Francesco StellacciAbstract:The Interfacial Energy between a macroscopic surface consisting of different materials and a liquid is independent of the surface structure. It is now shown that because of the way in which a multicomponent nanoscale surface affects the solvent–molecule arrangement, it is both the surface structure and composition that dictate the Interfacial Energy. Natural surfaces are often structured with nanometre-scale domains, yet a framework providing a quantitative understanding of how nanostructure affects Interfacial Energy, γ _SL, is lacking. Conventional continuum thermodynamics treats γ _SL solely as a function of average composition, ignoring structure. Here we show that, when a surface has domains commensurate in size with solvent molecules, γ _SL is determined not only by its average composition but also by a structural component that causes γ _SL to deviate from the continuum prediction by a substantial amount, as much as 20% in our system. By contrasting surfaces coated with either molecular- (5 nm), we find that whereas the latter surfaces have the expected linear dependence of γ _SL on surface composition, the former show a markedly different non-monotonic trend. Molecular dynamics simulations show how the organization of the solvent molecules at the interface is controlled by the nanostructured surface, which in turn appreciably modifies γ _SL.
-
the effect of nanometre scale structure on Interfacial Energy
Nature Materials, 2009Co-Authors: Jeffrey J. Kuna, Kislon Voïtchovsky, Chetana Singh, Hao Jiang, Steve Mwenifumbo, Pradip K. Ghorai, Molly M. Stevens, Sharon C. Glotzer, Francesco StellacciAbstract:Natural surfaces are often structured with nanometre-scale domains, yet a framework providing a quantitative understanding of how nanostructure affects Interfacial Energy, SL, is lacking. Conventional continuum thermodynamics treats SL solely as a function of average composition, ignoring structure. Here we show that, when a surface has domains commensurate in size with solvent molecules, SL is determined not only by its average composition but also by a structural component that causes SL to deviate from the continuum prediction by a substantial amount, as much as 20% in our system. By contrasting surfaces coated with either molecular- ( 5 nm), we find that whereas the latter surfaces have the expected linear dependence of SL on surface composition, the former show a markedly different non-monotonic trend. Molecular dynamics simulations show how the organization of the solvent molecules at the interface is controlled by the nanostructured surface, which in turn appreciably modifies SL.
Necmettin Maraşlı - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
thermal conductivity and Interfacial Energy of solid bi solution in the bi al zn eutectic system
Fluid Phase Equilibria, 2010Co-Authors: Sezen Aksoz, Y. Ocak, Necmettin Maraşlı, K. KeşlioğluAbstract:Abstract The equilibrated grain boundary groove shapes for solid Bi solution (Bi–6.1 at.%Zn–0.38 at.%Al) in equilibrium with the Bi–Al–Zn eutectic liquid have been observed from quenched sample with a radial heat flow apparatus. The Gibbs–Thomson coefficient, solid–liquid Interfacial Energy and grain boundary Energy of solid Bi solution have been determined from the observed grain boundary groove shapes. The variations of thermal conductivity with temperature for solid Bi solution (Bi–6.1 at.%Zn–0.38 at.%Al) has been measured up to five degree below the melting temperature by using radial heat flow technique. The ratio of thermal conductivity of equilibrated Bi–Al–Zn eutectic liquid phase to solid Bi solution (Bi–6.1 at.%Zn–0.38 at.%Al) phase has also been measured with a Bridgman type growth apparatus at the melting temperature.
-
measurement of solid liquid Interfacial Energy in the in bi eutectic alloy at low melting temperature
Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter, 2007Co-Authors: Necmettin Maraşlı, Y. Ocak, U. Böyük, K. Keşlioğlu, Sami Akbulut, Hasan Kaya, Emin ÇadirliAbstract:The Gibbs‐Thomson coefficient and solid‐liquid Interfacial Energy of the solid In solution in equilibrium with In Bi eutectic liquid have been determined to be (1.46 ± 0.07) × 10 −7 Kma nd(40.4 ± 4.0) × 10 −3 Jm −2 by observing the equilibrated grain boundary groove shapes. The grain boundary Energy of the solid In solution phase has been calculated to be (79.0 ± 8.7) × 10 −3 Jm −2 by considering force balance at the grain boundary grooves. The thermal conductivities of the In‐12.4 at.% Bi eutectic liquid phase and the solid In solution phase and their ratio at the eutectic melting temperature (72 ◦ C) have also been measured with radial heat flow apparatus and Bridgman-type growth apparatus.
-
Measurement of solid–liquid Interfacial Energy for solid d-camphor solution in equilibrium with succinonitrile d-camphor eutectic liquid
Scripta Materialia, 2006Co-Authors: Y. Ocak, U. Böyük, K. Keşlioğlu, Sami Akbulut, M. Erol, Necmettin MaraşlıAbstract:The Gibbs–Thomson coefficient, solid–liquid Interfacial Energy and grain boundary Energy of solid d -camphor solution in equilibrium with succinonitrile d -camphor eutectic liquid have been determined from the observed grain boundary groove shapes. Thermal conductivities of eutectic solid and eutectic liquid at the eutectic melting temperature have also been measured.
-
Solid–liquid Interfacial Energy of camphene
Materials Science and Engineering A-structural Materials Properties Microstructure and Processing, 1999Co-Authors: B. Bayender, Necmettin Maraşlı, Emin Çadirli, Mustafa GündüzAbstract:The Gibbs‐Thomson coefficient and the solid‐liquid Interfacial Energy for camphene have been measured to be (8.5890.96) 10 8 K m and (4.4390.49)10 3 Jm 2 , respectively, by a direct method. The grain boundary Energy of camphene has also been calculated to be (8.3690.92)10 3 Jm 2 from the observed grain boundary groove shapes. © 1999 Elsevier Science S.A.
Zhao Xu - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
solubility data of trisodium citrate hydrates in aqueous solution and crystal solution Interfacial Energy of the pentahydrate
Crystal Research and Technology, 2012Co-Authors: Yanlei Wang, Zhao XuAbstract:In this paper, the solubility of trisodium citrate dihydrate and trisodium citrate pentahydrate in water was experimentally determined. From solubility data, it was found that the relationship between trisodium citrate dihydrate and trisodium citrate pentahydrate is enantiotropic with a transition temperature at 315.4±1.0 K. Different hydrates can be isolated safely by controlling the crystallization temperature. The induction periods of trisodium citrate pentahydrate in aqueous solution were measured at different temperatures. The crystal–solution Interfacial Energy was calculated by using classical nucleation (CL) theory, mononuclear (MN) and polynuclear (PL) mechanisms through the relationship between induction period and supersaturation. It was found that the Interfacial Energy values calculated by using the CL theory and the MN model are nearly the same while Interfacial Energy calculated by PN model are about 40% higher. (© 2012 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)
-
Solubility data of trisodium citrate hydrates in aqueous solution and crystal‐solution Interfacial Energy of the pentahydrate
Crystal Research and Technology, 2012Co-Authors: Yanlei Wang, Zhao XuAbstract:In this paper, the solubility of trisodium citrate dihydrate and trisodium citrate pentahydrate in water was experimentally determined. From solubility data, it was found that the relationship between trisodium citrate dihydrate and trisodium citrate pentahydrate is enantiotropic with a transition temperature at 315.4±1.0 K. Different hydrates can be isolated safely by controlling the crystallization temperature. The induction periods of trisodium citrate pentahydrate in aqueous solution were measured at different temperatures. The crystal–solution Interfacial Energy was calculated by using classical nucleation (CL) theory, mononuclear (MN) and polynuclear (PL) mechanisms through the relationship between induction period and supersaturation. It was found that the Interfacial Energy values calculated by using the CL theory and the MN model are nearly the same while Interfacial Energy calculated by PN model are about 40% higher. (© 2012 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)
